DOCSLIB.ORG

Flash Memory SIG Discussion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flash Memory SIG Discussion Flash Memory SIG Discussion Dongjun Shin Samsung Electronics January 26th, 2005 1 Contents • Samsung’s experience with flash memory file system • Technical Issues related to flash memory – Handling various type of flash devices in a consistent way – Bad block management –ECC scheme – Flash translation layer – Wear leveling – Garbage collection – Boot loader – And so on • Conclusion • Discussion January 26th, 2005 2 Development of Linux RFS • Development history – No-OS version of RFS was developed, and it was ported to Linux afterwards (named “Linux RFS”) due to the customer’s request • Requirement of RFS (draft) –FAT compatible – Robust (against system failure) – Optimized for NAND • Exception handling for bad-block and ECC • Portable across different NAND chip & target platform • Should have performance as close as the spec of datasheet • Bootable January 26th, 2005 3 Issues during Migration • Design-level decision – What about JFFS2 or YAFFS? – Having its own S/W stack or use MTD? – How does MTD support NAND in its design? • Integration with Linux file system layer – Uncertainty factor: page cache, buffer cache, disk scheduler, faucet – Is the full S/W stack controllable? (to meet the performance and robustness requirement) • Driver optimization & portability (when adopting to MTD) – How do we support large-page/multi-planed NAND and OneNAND? – How do we support new features of NAND? (ex. Cache read, cache write, copy-back) – How to handle bad block using replacement scheme? January 26th, 2005 4 Linux RFS Architecture Applications Kernel File System Interface : added during porting VFS (Virtual File System) RFS Package ext2 iso9660 … CRAMFS RFS to VFS Glue Layer Linux Kernel Distribution RFS Flash Raw Block Dev. Flash Logical Block Dev. MMC Blk Dev. Flash Translation Layer Universal Flash Driver Small Block Large Block OneNAND LLD NAND LLD NAND LLD Small Block Large Block OneNAND MMC NAND NAND January 26th, 2005 5 Issues • Handling various type of flash devices in a consistent way • Bad block management •ECC scheme • Flash translation layer • Wear leveling • Garbage collection • Partition table • Boot loader • Exploiting New flash memory technologies – New operations: multi-plane, cache program, cache read, copy back – New type devices: OneNAND, MLC • Other considerations January 26th, 2005 6 Handling various flash memories in a consistent way • Supporting different type of flash memory, I/F, and configurations – NAND: single/multi plane, small/large page, SLC/MLC, NAND with NOR I/F (OneNAND), mux/demux – NOR: SLC/MLC – Expanding memory capacity by cascading multiple devices • Accessing flash memory devices mtdblock Sector-oriented (partition, sector) JFFS2 Byte-oriented (direct access to flash memory operations per partition) Linux RFS Page-oriented (dev, block, page-group) January 26th, 2005 7 Handling various flash memories in a consistent way (Cont’d) • Multi-plane structure • How about MLC? • Why consistency matters? – To make the porting work easy – To make the best use of performance provided by underlying H/W January 26th, 2005 8 Bad Block Management • “Bad Block” definition – On NAND flash memory, some bad blocks may exist at initial purchase time or at runtime (< 2% of entire blocks) • Bad block management (BBM) scheme – Replace bad block with good one (preferred!) • Bad block management layer handles bad block both at initialization and at runtime with spare blocks • Upper layer doesn’t care about the bad block • Lots of commercial S/W stack for flash memory use this approach – Just skip bad block • Example: JFFS2, YAFFS on MTD • File system should consider the existence of bad block January 26th, 2005 9 Bad Block Management (Cont’d) • Issues with replacement scheme – Need some reserved area for replacement (like spare tire!) – Need map table to maintain replacement status – Compatibility issue: what if boot loader (or gang programmer) and file system uses different scheme? – Possible IP infringement • Common questions related with BBM – Which is the best place to handle bad block? – Bad block management unit: partition or chip? – How to use file system X on NAND? (including cramfs/romfs) – How to boot from NAND? – How to gang-program NAND? January 26th, 2005 10 ECC Scheme • Background – On NAND, 1bit error is considered as normal and need to be corrected with ECC – ECC code is stored on spare area of NAND • How ECC is handled? – S/W method: generate ECC code by computation – H/W method: CPU or NAND chip has a special H/W logic to auto- generate ECC – Linux MTD support both methods •Problem of ECC – A flash file system may not work on some H/W platform that support H/W ECC due to different ECC layout on spare area (Ex. YAFFS on OneNAND)* – Compatibility issue: which spared bytes are used for ECC bytes? *: recent version of MTD support ECC layout customization January 26th, 2005 11 ECC Scheme (Cont’d) Spare area assignment standard by Samsung Electronics (http://www.samsung.com/Products/Semiconductor/Flash/TechnicalInfo/spare_assignment_standard_20030221.pdf) January 26th, 2005 12 Wear-leveling • Background – Flash memories have upper limit on the number of erase count for each block • 100K for NAND – Traditional file systems tend to concentrate updates to specific region (ex. Metadata) – Without wear-leveling, flash memory may wear-out in shorter time than expected • Wear-leveling method – Perfect method: keep erase count for each block – Heuristic method: reuse blocks in a round-robin way (erase count follows normal distribution) • Ex. JFFS2 January 26th, 2005 13 Flash Translation Layer (FTL) •Role of FTL – Translate sector read/write into flash read/program/ erase operations – Common to NOR/NAND • Linux MTD already has this feature – mtdblock, mtdchar – FTL, NFTL (by M-Sys)*: seems to handle wear- leveling and bad-block replacement as well *: usage is limited to some devices due to patent January 26th, 2005 14 Garbage Collection • Flash memory does not permit in-place editing – A block should be erased before programming – In some LFS-like implementations, new blocks are used during update as well as creation of pages • Ex. File update, file system metadata update • Garbage collections of several partially used blocks are required to make clean block => performance issues • In Linux, JFFS2 and YAFFS do this operation January 26th, 2005 15 Boot Loader • Some CPU provides facility to boot from NAND using NFC – How do we enable it? (n-stage booting) • Ex. IPL => u-boot => kernel – How to access NAND flash? (NAND driver) – How to load/update kernel image? (BBM-related) • Implementation issue – Duplication of BBM and driver sources in boot loader and file system • If you’re interested in booting from NAND, please ask me a demo! ☺ January 26th, 2005 16 Exploiting New Technologies • Copy-back – Using internal buffer to load and store a page on NAND cell (bypassing the ‘transfer to host memory’ stage) Internal 1 Host Mem NAND buffer 2 • Write while program (or cache program) – Overlapping the program & write operation 2 Internal 1 Host Mem NAND buffer • Read while load – Using dual-buffer for overlapping load & read operation* Internal buffer Host Mem 1 NAND Internal 2 buffer * specific to OneNAND January 26th, 2005 17 Other Considerations • Embedded vs. card-type – Embedded: directly connected to CPU via memory bus – Card-type: via dedicated bus or other bus (ex. USB) – Common confusions • Block device or USB mass storage? => depends on the type of connectivity • What kind of S/W should be stacked? => depends on the existence of controller inside the memory (card) and on the type of file system • Partition Table – In the source code – On the flash memory (runtime modifiable) January 26th, 2005 18 Conclusion • Linux MTD is a versatile framework for memory-type devices – Lots of support for NOR have already been made and NAND support is catching up • However, there are still some issues that need to be addressed and improved in MTD – Bad block management by replacement – Assumption about I/O unit size, ECC usage – Optimization for new technologies • It’s not just a matter of implementation, but also of standardization January 26th, 2005 19 Discussion • Should there be a FM WG? – Anyway, the flash memory vendor will provide necessary S/W stack • Scope of FM WG – MTD only? – Incorporate all flash memory related issues? January 26th, 2005 20.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CS 152: Computer Systems Architecture Storage Technologies
    CS 152: Computer Systems Architecture Storage Technologies Sang-Woo Jun Winter 2019 Storage Used To be a Secondary Concern Typically, storage was not a first order citizen of a computer system o As alluded to by its name “secondary storage” o Its job was to load programs and data to memory, and disappear o Most applications only worked with CPU and system memory (DRAM) o Extreme applications like DBMSs were the exception Because conventional secondary storage was very slow o Things are changing! Some (Pre)History Magnetic core memory Rope memory (ROM) 1960’s Drum memory 1950~1970s 72 KiB per cubic foot! 100s of KiB (1024 bits in photo) Hand-woven to program the 1950’s Apollo guidance computer Photos from Wikipedia Some (More Recent) History Floppy disk drives 1970’s~2000’s 100 KiBs to 1.44 MiB Hard disk drives 1950’s to present MBs to TBs Photos from Wikipedia Some (Current) History Solid State Drives Non-Volatile Memory 2000’s to present 2010’s to present GB to TBs GBs Hard Disk Drives Dominant storage medium for the longest time o Still the largest capacity share Data organized into multiple magnetic platters o Mechanical head needs to move to where data is, to read it o Good sequential access, terrible random access • 100s of MB/s sequential, maybe 1 MB/s 4 KB random o Time for the head to move to the right location (“seek time”) may be ms long • 1000,000s of cycles! Typically “ATA” (Including IDE and EIDE), and later “SATA” interfaces o Connected via “South bridge” chipset Ding Yuan, “Operating Systems ECE344 Lecture 11: File
    [Show full text]
  • BEC Brochure for Partners
    3724 Heron Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303, USA +1 (650) 272-03-84 (USA and Canada) +7 (812) 926-64-74 (Europe and other regions) BELKASOFT EVIDENCE CENTER All-in-one forensic solution for locating, extracting, and analyzing digital evidence stored inside computers and mobile devices and mobile devices, RAM and cloud. Belkasoft Evidence Center is designed with forensic experts and investigators in mind: it automatically performs multiple tasks without requiring your presence, allowing you to speed up the investigation; at the same time, the product has convenient interface, making it a powerful, yet easy-to-use tool for data extraction, search, and analysis. INCLUDES Fully automated extraction and Advanced low-level expertise analysis of 1000+ types of evidence Concise and adjustable reports, Destroyed and hidden evidence accepted by courts recovery via data carving Case Management and a possibility Live RAM analysis to create a portable case to share with a colleague at no cost TYPES OF EVIDENCE SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE CENTER Office documents System files, including Windows 10 Email clients timeline and TOAST, macOS plists, smartphone Wi-Fi and Bluetooth Pictures and videos configurations etc. Mobile application data Cryptocurrencies Web browser histories, cookies, cache, passwords, etc. Registry files Chats and instant messenger histories SQLite databases Social networks and cloud services Peer-to-peer software Encrypted files and volumes Plist files TYPES OF ANALYSIS PERFORMED BY EVIDENCE CENTER Existing files search and analysis. Low-level investigation using Hex Viewer Timeline analysis - ability to display and filter all user activities and system events in a single aggregated view Full-text search through all types of collected evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Recursive Updates in Copy-On-Write File Systems - Modeling and Analysis
    2342 JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS, VOL. 9, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2014 Recursive Updates in Copy-on-write File Systems - Modeling and Analysis Jie Chen*, Jun Wang†, Zhihu Tan*, Changsheng Xie* *School of Computer Science and Technology Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China *Wuhan National Laboratory for Optoelectronics, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China [email protected], {stan, cs_xie}@hust.edu.cn †Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida 32826, USA [email protected] Abstract—Copy-On-Write (COW) is a powerful technique recursive update. Recursive updates can lead to several for data protection in file systems. Unfortunately, it side effects to a storage system, such as write introduces a recursively updating problem, which leads to a amplification (also can be referred as additional writes) side effect of write amplification. Studying the behaviors of [4], I/O pattern alternation [5], and performance write amplification is important for designing, choosing and degradation [6]. This paper focuses on the side effects of optimizing the next generation file systems. However, there are many difficulties for evaluation due to the complexity of write amplification. file systems. To solve this problem, we proposed a typical Studying the behaviors of write amplification is COW file system model based on BTRFS, verified its important for designing, choosing, and optimizing the correctness through carefully designed experiments. By next generation file systems, especially when the file analyzing this model, we found that write amplification is systems uses a flash-memory-based underlying storage greatly affected by the distributions of files being accessed, system under online transaction processing (OLTP) which varies from 1.1x to 4.2x.
    [Show full text]
  • Yaffs Direct Interface
    Yaffs Direct Interface Charles Manning 2017-06-07 This document describes the Yaffs Direct Interface (YDI), which allows Yaffs to be simply integrated with embedded systems, with or without an RTOS. Table of Contents 1 Background.............................................................................................................................3 2 Licensing.................................................................................................................................3 3 What are Yaffs and Yaffs Direct Interface?.............................................................................3 4 Why use Yaffs?........................................................................................................................4 5 Source Code and Yaffs Resources ..........................................................................................4 6 System Requirements..............................................................................................................5 7 How to integrate Yaffs with an RTOS/Embedded system......................................................5 7.1 Source Files......................................................................................................................6 7.2 Integrating the POSIX Application Interface...................................................................9 8 RTOS Integration Interface...................................................................................................11 9 Yaffs NAND Model..............................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • YAFFS a NAND Flash Filesystem
    Project Genesis Flash hardware YAFFS fundamentals Filesystem Details Embedded Use YAFFS A NAND flash filesystem Wookey [email protected] Aleph One Ltd Balloonboard.org Toby Churchill Ltd Embedded Linux Conference - Europe Linz Project Genesis Flash hardware YAFFS fundamentals Filesystem Details Embedded Use 1 Project Genesis 2 Flash hardware 3 YAFFS fundamentals 4 Filesystem Details 5 Embedded Use Project Genesis Flash hardware YAFFS fundamentals Filesystem Details Embedded Use Project Genesis TCL needed a reliable FS for NAND Charles Manning is the man Considered Smartmedia compatibile scheme (FAT+FTL) Considered JFFS2 Better than FTL High RAM use Slow boot times Project Genesis Flash hardware YAFFS fundamentals Filesystem Details Embedded Use History Decided to create ’YAFFS’ - Dec 2001 Working on NAND emulator - March 2002 Working on real NAND (Linux) - May 2002 WinCE version - Aug 2002 ucLinux use - Sept 2002 Linux rootfs - Nov 2002 pSOS version - Feb 2003 Shipping commercially - Early 2003 Linux 2.6 supported - Aug 2004 YAFFS2 - Dec 2004 Checkpointing - May 2006 Project Genesis Flash hardware YAFFS fundamentals Filesystem Details Embedded Use Flash primer - NOR vs NAND NOR flash NAND flash Access mode: Linear random access Page access Replaces: ROM Mass Storage Cost: Expensive Cheap Device Density: Low (64MB) High (1GB) Erase block 8k to 128K typical 32x512b / 64x2K pages size: Endurance: 100k to 1M erasures 10k to 100k erasures Erase time: 1second 2ms Programming: Byte by Byte, no limit on writes Page programming, must be erased before re-writing Data sense: Program byte to change 1s to 0s. Program page to change 1s to 0s. Erase block to change 0s to 1s Erase to change 0s to 1s Write Ordering: Random access programming Pages must be written sequen- tially within block Bad blocks: None when delivered, but will Bad blocks expected when deliv- wear out so filesystems should be ered.
    [Show full text]
  • FRASH: Hierarchical File System for FRAM and Flash
    FRASH: Hierarchical File System for FRAM and Flash Eun-ki Kim 1,2 Hyungjong Shin 1,2 Byung-gil Jeon 1,2 Seokhee Han 1 Jaemin Jung 1 Youjip Won 1 1Dept. of Electronics and Computer Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea 2Samsung Electronics Co., Seoul, Korea [email protected] Abstract. In this work, we develop novel file system, FRASH, for byte- addressable NVRAM (FRAM[1]) and NAND Flash device. Byte addressable NVRAM and NAND Flash is typified by the DRAM-like fast access latency and high storage density, respectively. Hierarchical storage architecture which consists of byte-addressable NVRAM and NAND Flash device can bring synergy and can greatly enhance the efficiency of file system in various aspects. Unfortunately, current state of art file system for Flash device is not designed for byte-addressable NVRAM with DRAM-like access latency. FRASH file system (File System for FRAM an NAND Flash) aims at exploiting physical characteristics of FRAM and NAND Flash device. It effectively resolves long mount time issue which has long been problem in legacy LFS style NAND Flash file system. In FRASH file system, NVRAM is mapped into memory address space and contains file system metadata and file metadata information. Consistency between metadata in NVRAM and data in NAND Flash is maintained via transaction. In hardware aspect, we successfully developed hierarchical storage architecture. We used 8 MByte FRAM which is the largest chip allowed by current state of art technology. We compare the performance of FRASH with legacy Its-style file system for NAND Flash. FRASH file system achieves x5 improvement in file system mount latency.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft NTFS for Linux by Paragon Software 9.7.5
    Paragon Technologie GmbH Leo-Wohleb-Straße 8 ∙ 79098 Freiburg, Germany Tel. +49-761-59018-201 ∙ Fax +49-761-59018-130 Website: www.paragon-software.com E-mail: [email protected] Microsoft NTFS for Linux by Paragon Software 9.7.5 User manual Copyright© 1994-2021 Paragon Technologie GmbH. All rights reserved. Abstract This document covers implementation of NTFS & HFS+ file system support in Linux operating sys- tems using Paragon NTFS & HFS+ file system driver. Basic installation procedures are described. Detailed mount options description is given.File system creation (formatting) and checking utilities are described.List of supported NTFS & HFS+ features is given with limitations imposed by Linux. There is also advanced troubleshooting section. Information Copyright© 2021 Paragon Technologie GmbH All rights reserved. No parts of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means - graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information storage and re- trieval systems - without the written permission of the publisher. Products that are referred to in this document may be trademarks and/or registered trademarks of the respective owners. The publisher and the author make no claim to these trademarks. While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this document, the publisher and the author assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of information contained in this document or from the use of programs and source code that may ac- company it. In no event shall the publisher and the author be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damage caused or alleged to have been caused directly or indirectly by this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Yaffs Robustness and Testing
    Yaffs Robustness and Testing Charles Manning 2017-06-07 Many embedded systems need to store critical data, making reliable file systems an important part of modern embedded system design. That robustness is not achieved through chance. Robustness is only achieved through design and extensive testing to verify that the file system functions correctly and is resistant to power failure. This document describes some of the important design criteria and design features used to achieve a robust design. The test methodologies are also described. Table of Contents 1 Background.............................................................................................................................2 2 Flash File System considerations............................................................................................3 3 How Yaffs achieves robustness and performance...................................................................5 4 Testing.....................................................................................................................................8 4.1 Power Fail Stress Testing.................................................................................................8 4.2 Testing the Yaffs Direct Interface API..............................................................................9 4.3 Linux Testing....................................................................................................................9 4.4 Fuzz Testing......................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Journaling File Systems
    JOURNALING FILE SYSTEMS CS124 – Operating Systems Spring 2021, Lecture 26 2 File System Robustness • The operating system keeps a cache of filesystem data • Secondary storage devices are much slower than main memory • Caching frequently-used disk blocks in memory yields significant performance improvements by avoiding disk-IO operations • ProBlem 1: Operating systems crash. Hardware fails. • ProBlem 2: Many filesystem operations involve multiple steps • Example: deleting a file minimally involves removing a directory entry, and updating the free map • May involve several other steps depending on filesystem design • If only some of these steps are successfully written to disk, filesystem corruption is highly likely 3 File System Robustness (2) • The OS should try to maintain the filesystem’s correctness • …at least, in some minimal way… • Example: ext2 filesystems maintain a “mount state” in the filesystem’s superBlock on disk • When filesystem is mounted, this value is set to indicate how the filesystem is mounted (e.g. read-only, etc.) • When the filesystem is cleanly unmounted, the mount-state is set to EXT2_VALID_FS to record that the filesystem is trustworthy • When OS starts up, if it sees an ext2 drive’s mount-state as not EXT2_VALID_FS, it knows something happened • The OS can take steps to verify the filesystem, and fix it if needed • Typically, this involves running the fsck system utility • “File System Consistency checK” • (Frequently, OSes also run scheduled filesystem checks too) 4 The fsck Utility • To verify the filesystem,
    [Show full text]
  • Flash File System Considerations
    Flash File System Considerations Charles Manning 2014-08-18 We have been developing flash file system for embedded systems since 1995. Dur- ing that time, we have gained a wealth of knowledge and experience. This document outlines some of the major issues that must be considered when selecting a Flash File system for embedded use. It also explains how using the Yaffs File System increases reliability, reduces risk and saves money. Introduction As embedded system complexity increases and flash storage prices decrease, we see more use of embedded file systems to store data, and so data corruption and loss has become an important cause of system failure. When Aleph One began the development of Yaffs in late 2001, we built on experience in flash file system design since 1995. This experience helped to identify the key factors in mak- ing Yaffs a fast and robust flash file system now being widely used around the world. Although it was originally developed for Linux, Yaffs was designed to be highly portable. This has allowed Yaffs to be ported to many different OSs (including Linux, BSD, Windows CE) and numerous RTOSs (including VxWorks, eCos and pSOS). Yaffs is written in fully portable C code and has been used on many different CPU architec- tures – both little- and big-endian. These include ARM, x86 and PowerPC, soft cores such as NIOS and Microblaze and even various DSP architectures. We believe that the Yaffs code base has been used on more OS types and more CPU types than any other file system code base. Since its introduction, Yaffs has been used in hundreds of different products and hundreds of millions of different devices in widely diverse application areas from mining to aerospace and everything in between.
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned by Camscanner
    Page 1 of 65. Scanned by CamScanner Broad Based Specifications of Vehicle for Scene of Crime Unit of National Cyber Forensic Laboratory for Evidentiary purpose S. No. Name of the Tool Specifications 2. Digital Forensic 1. Support collection of data from file systems including NTFS, FAT (12, 16 & 32 bit), EXFAT, HFS+, XFS, APFS, EXT2, EXT3 & Triage Tool Kit EXT4. 2. Support collection of data from both UEFI and BIOS based systems. 3. Support Profile configuration based on case. 4. Support digital forensic triage from powered off computers (Desktops, Laptops, Servers aka windows/linux/iOS)and running Windows computers(NTFS/FAT). 5. Support capture of volatile data/memory (RAM capture) 6. Support collection of Files from Removable Media (e.g. USB Drives) 7. Support collection of Files from Forensic Images (E01, DD etc.) 8. Support collection of files from Devices with Internal Memory Storage E.g. Digital Cameras. 9. Support physical backup to be supported by popular digital forensic tools. 10. Support extraction of data from Customised Locations. 11. Support data collection from mounted encrypted partitions. 12. Support automated analysis and report generation in PDF/HTML/DOCX of files collected from a target device. 13. Support automatic Logging (Device, Processing & User Interaction) of activities. 14. Support filter of data by Criteria to Target Specific Results. 15. Support Identify, Process and Display Browser History, Display Contents of E-Mail, Chat, Social Media Artefacts. 16. Support automatic indexing and tagging of hash and keyword matches. 17. Support time lining. 18. Solution in a ruggedized portable system with suitable processing and configuration as below: a.
    [Show full text]
  • CS 5472 - Advanced Topics in Computer Security
    CS 5472 - Advanced Topics in Computer Security Topic 5: Deniable Encryption (2) Spring 2021 Semester Instructor: Bo Chen [email protected] https://cs.mtu.edu/~bchen Review: Use Hidden Volume to Mitigate Coercive Attacks • A coercive attacker can enforce the victim to disclose the TELL ME YOUR KEY!!! decryption key • A hidden volume-based PDE (plausibly deniable encryption) system can be used in mobile devices to mitigate coercive attacks (Mobiflage as presented on Tuesday) secret offset hidden volume public volume (public data) random (encrypted with true key) (encrypted with decoy key) noise storage medium Deniability Compromise 1: The Attacker Can Have Access to The Disk Multiple Times • By having multiple snapshots on the storage medium, the attacker can compromise deniability • Compare different snapshots and can observe the changes/modifications over the hidden volume, which was not supposed to happen • Hidden volume is hidden in the empty space of the public volume secret offset random public volume (public data) hidden volume noise (encrypted with decoy key) (encrypted with true key) storage medium Deniability Compromise 2: from The Underlying Storage Hardware • Mobile devices usually use flash memory as the underlying storage media, rather than mechanical hard disks • eMMC cards • miniSD cards • MicroSD cards • Flash memory has significantly different hardware nature compared to mechanical disk drives, which may cause deniability compromises unknown by the upper layers (application, file system, and block layer) NAND Flash is Usually
    [Show full text]